conworldfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Gatemonger
__TOC__ Quantum Entanglement What is Quantum Entanglement?! —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:23, June 8, 2010 (UTC) Hey, i put a link on the hesperia city talk page if the expnanation i give isnt sufficient. basically, its the transfering of the properties of one quantum particle to another by means of laws governing the Heisenburg Uncertainty principle. that is what the entanglers do. they are the "toroids" i mentioned in future world events 2010.Gatemonger 00:35, June 8, 2010 (UTC) Wow. Now I ask, how do you apply that. You just set a course of entangled particles? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:44, June 8, 2010 (UTC) two electrons are entangled then placed in separate toroids. one is sent to an orbit close to the sun, eg: landing on mercury. thats what i did. the remaining toroid left on earth, with the other electron in the pair, gets energized at the same time the electron orbiting the sun is energized by photons hitting it from the sun, or whatever energy source you are using. the energy is released only when the electron on the transmitting end is destroyed. each power relay station has a system to receive the energy from the main terminal, in my case, orbiting the sun near mercury's orbit. there is a powerful automated system which entangles electrons harvested from the solar wind, while simultaneously entangling those new electrons in coordination with another automated system on earth. the energy from the photons, anticlimaticly, generates heat, which generates local energy for local communities. we plan on building a whole bunch of these devices, but currently, the only one in existance is powering the FGC's orbital transport/bomber. the FGC is willing to sell this whole technology system to Hesperian Alliance members. what do you think?Gatemonger 01:03, June 8, 2010 (UTC) Chat Come on Future World chat. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC) FCG Hey Gatemonger, welcome to ConWorlds! I made a welcome gift for you and you tell me if it's ok, or if you'd like a change or something like that: The double-headed eagle represents the union of two forces, the blue means unity and stability and red means power and leadership. Sir Spart Sparklbox 22:57, June 9, 2010 (UTC) AWESOME!! what program did you use? i liek it the way it is, btw. can you make a flag for the hesperian alliance please? and does central america want in? 23:32, June 9, 2010 (UTC) Well, I used Adobe Illustrator. It will be a pleasure to design a flag for the Alliance. Do you have any ideas on mind or do you want me to create it from scratch? Oh, and if it's not much trouble, I agree on joining the Hesperian Alliance. Sir Spart Sparklbox 01:22, June 10, 2010 (UTC) I was thinking something similar to Dr. Manhattan's logo from Watchmen, with instead of a proton in the middle a globe representing the earth; put this on an eagle perched on top of a cross;the rest, you can do however you see fit; btw, the globe should be visible, not the size of the nucleus compared to the electron orbit in the logo. If this is too hard, feel free to modify it as seen fit.Thanks for everything.Gatemonger 03:50, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Unless you already started, I wanna give you full creative freedom. Just make something cool that represents the alliance and the western civilization. You are too cool, man. Thanks again.Gatemonger 03:55, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Alright, I'll start tomorrow. You know, I have school, homework, and some other pending art proyects, but I'll try to do it as soon as possible. Thanks, you're cool too! And you're welcome. Sir Spart Sparklbox 04:38, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Hey GMong, take a look: Do you like it? Does it need any change? Would you like something else? Sir Spart Sparklbox 03:51, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Lol nice recycling. Btw looks cool. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 03:55, June 17, 2010 (UTC) I like it a lot. I consider the eagle and christianity symbols of the west, so this is great. Leave it as it is. I am curious, what is that yellow circle shape in the background? explain the symbolism, i plan on making an article explaining the flag.Gatemonger 03:58, June 17, 2010 (UTC) Why are u messing with the EU? Hey there. Just a question why are you messing EU up like that? First of all Russia has and will NEVER be a part of the EU! Second the threaty of Berlin? whats up with that? That would never ever happen. You can't jut use EU like that! Its okay that Germany, France and Belgium joined together in a new country, but dont mess up the EU with all the hierachy and stuff it's just silly. We are 2 members of the EU in the future world, so don't be all dictatorish. You're ruining the EU! --Dennisbyg 11:52, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Just wondering if you read THIS... Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 12:42, June 10, 2010 (UTC) If you're asking me then yes: 3. You may NOT control "blank" nations. These consist of countries that exist in reality such as the United States, China and Russia.' They are blank because they are controlled by no one.' You may declare war against or invade blanks. You may have blank nations attack your own nation. You may respond to real world events in blank nations. You may trade with blanks. You may make treaties with blanks (ally, peace, enemy, war). World organizations are also considered blanks. You may NOT control the UN or NATO for example. You may join said organizations, react to them, have a character give a speech or discuss with other players' nations in the UN or other organizations. --Dennisbyg 12:46, June 10, 2010 (UTC) That question was for Gatemonger. He seems to push over the line repeatedly so I wanted to know if he read the rules. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 12:52, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Oh well now he has a t least part of the rules :) Dennisbyg 14:22, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Yes, I have read the rules. If the issue is the War in Myanmar then here are my justifications: 1-Italy and the UK are allies of FGC; they are part of the FGC's coailition, similar to Bush's coalition of the willing, and I am pretty sure that we can control what alliances blanks join. 2-My nation is using Myanmar as part of a larger war campaign against Yarphei, and Myanmar currently is independent. I am propping up the Democratic Voice for Burma as the new regime in Myanmar, liek what Everett did with the Green coalition in Iran.It is just as legal as Everett's move. If there are other instances of pushing the rules, elaborate on what they are so I know how to adjust my war strategy. In regards to the heirarchy, that was the alternative proposal in the Treaty of Berlin, as opposed to a European Federation. It was meant to create a more solid framework in the EU without compromising national sovereignty. I would be willing to colaborate with Dennisbyg to see what exactly are his complaints. But there will be some heirarchy.Gatemonger 19:51, June 10, 2010 (UTC) You can't change Myanmar without everyone's permission unless it's your own country. Myanmar is an important political center for OIS and I ask that you keep out of Myanmar's internal affairs. And also, once you have created North Burma, you are bound by the FW rules to create solid, quality articles rather than creating puppet nations for your own benefit. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 20:13, June 10, 2010 (UTC) You're breaking the rules with all that EU stuff DELETE all EU related from you're pages and every thing should be fine you can't control the EU! Dennisbyg 20:47, June 10, 2010 (UTC) :Just stay calm. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • ) 21:05, June 10, 2010 (UTC) ::I really hate it when people say that. It's so annoying. "Just stay calm". Lol. Anyway, I agree, I think the hierarchy stuff is crazy, lol. I'd strongly recommend deleting that stuff. Also, no there won't be some heirarchy. In the EU, ALL NATIONS ARE EQUAL. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:15, June 10, 2010 (UTC) This is something serious. I completely agree with the unification of France and German and the forging of a new superpower, but prohibiting freedom of religion? That's just impossible! You would be violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and therefore the FCG would be expelled from the UN and the EU as well, create a HUGE global controversy and lot of things more. There's no discussion at the matter. That's unacceptable. In the other hand, changing the EU it's a violation of the rules. Only if all countries in Europe were replaced by new nations in Future World something could be done, but still, you can't change anything regarding international organizations. Also, I don't believe a federal union in Europe would work, because the history and culture of each country has deep root because the longevity of most European countries. Sorry Gatemonger, but the Treaty of Berlin is something impossible. You may, though, keep the idea just as a proposal with a little acceptance within Europe, but nothing that would affect the EU and natural order. That's my word. Sir Spart Sparklbox 02:29, June 11, 2010 (UTC) You could turn the FGC in to something like this althist I found 2 months ago: a loosely bound federation, where each member of the federation has membership in the UN. Union of Soviet Sovereign Republics —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:39, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Also, I think you should call the Republic of North Burma either: Republic of Myanmar (as opposed to the Union of Myanmar) or the Republic of Burma. It would be nicknamed "North Burma" or "North Myanmar", while the Union of Myanmar would be nicknamed "South Burma" or "South Myanmar". —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:50, June 10, 2010 (UTC) Let's just get on chat. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:54, June 10, 2010 (UTC) I will get rid of the atheist stuff and edit the EU stuff. I do, however want someone to come up with a nonaggressive persuasion tactic i will be allowed to use to convert atheists in my country that won't be complained about by the other future world members. I will stop being so ambitious in burma, instead putting it directly under FGC control so as to have a bargaining tool to exchange with yarphei for belgium; as well, after the exchange, FGC and her allies will maintain the right to re invade if nukes or human rights violations, especially persecution of the DVB occurs. Happy?Gatemonger 23:58, June 10, 2010 (UTC) 1. Why would you want to convert atheists? 2. Yes. 3. Yes. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:08, June 11, 2010 (UTC) And I think I will take timemaster's recommendation. Here's my plan. After the original federation attempt of the EU failed, a new non-national( i don't control its members, save for FGC) organization will be added on top of the RW EU framework. This will replace the heirarchy system, which was the best idea i could come up with on my own for non-federal integration of the EU. What do you think? I really like timemaster's idea, and Slavia and Denmark can help me in fabricating this organization, which I am naming the Union of European Sovereign Republics. Notice the treaty of berlin page is incomplete. issues like this are the region why. thanks for the idea, TM.Gatemonger 00:09, June 11, 2010 (UTC) I want to convert atheists because religion helps people unify around common goals, progressive ones, not marxist ideas like irreligion. there will be protests allowed against religion, but no actions that can actually accomplish something, like legal reforms banning religion from schools. btw the public school system will be replaced by a private equivalent, so we dont end up with the brainwashing system we have in america, where everyone is taught only one side of the coin. true many people believe in global warming, but those who dont arent conspiratorial. insight such as this, a greater understanding of the world in an educated fully rational manner, is part of what FGC is all about.Gatemonger 00:20, June 11, 2010 (UTC) 1. NO IT DOES NOT!!! Religion DIVIDES people, it doesn't UNITE people! Because disagree about their religious thoughts and start bickering, then start a war and kill each other. People who believe in science unify for the common goal of finding out more. And Irreligion is not GODDAMN MARXIST! Very religious people are often unprogressive because they think their religion is more important than everyone else. OMG. 2. We need to teach kids that the Earth is warming up and species are getting killed off and we need to SAVE THE EARTH from losing a ton of species because of one huge overpopulated species (us). 3. Otherwise, that idea is good. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:31, June 11, 2010 (UTC) I disagree with the first two points wholeheartedly, and will not waste time trying to change another country's core beliefs, especially since Cascadia is pretty isolationist and unlikely to act aggresively. Whereas Cascadia is a liberal superpower, the Franco-German Commonwealth is, obviously, like its creator, conservative. it believes, as evidenced by its actions, that aggressive war is often more effective than negotiating, especially when dealing with aggressive regimes. I wanna see cascadia try negotiating with yarphei, which insists on being imperialistic.FGC hates political correctness(Myanmar vs Burma), and threats to the West ( Belgio-Yarphei). Burma will be used as a bargaining tool against Yarphei to regain Belgium. that combines war and diplomacy into a convenient little package. Cascadia and Franco-German Commonwealth are both western nations, but there are steep ideological differences. I don't dislike TM, however. You personally haven't done anything to make me dislike you in any form. In fact, I gained a lot of respect for you from that confederation althist you pointed out to me, I really like that idea.Gatemonger 00:44, June 11, 2010 (UTC) "I don't believe a federal union in Europe would work, because the history and culture of each country has deep root because the longevity of most European countries. Sorry Gatemonger, but the Treaty of Berlin is something impossible. You may, though, keep the idea just as a proposal with a little acceptance within Europe, but nothing that would affect the EU and natural order." For spartbox's comment, I was actually aware of that fact about federating europe,but thanks for your comments anyway. The Treaty of Berlin was originally a plan to federate the whole EU. it was, after outcries from member nations, modified to federate only France, Germany, and Belgium, the current state of affairs, while tighter integration would be accomplished through a structure I am drafting currently. I highly like that althist TM sent me the link to, which, I will admit I took as an insult due to the uncanny resemblence of the title to Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Btw, I will put CA as one of the members of hesperian and a very close ally, but this special relationship might change during the war with Everett. Im considering siding with you, actually. BTW, Yarphei will be removed from Europe by force if necessary, and without any consent from DK if he refuses to bargain. I won Burma, which is now basically the equivalent to French Guiana, New Cambodia, or the area surrounding Paris, basically a state. It is not its own independent nation now, and thus doesnt need its own article. It is part of my major nation, and will only be given up as soon as Yarphei leaves the following territories: -Falklands -Belgium -Northern Defense Line Choose your fate, Trunh Chup Yar!Gatemonger 03:58, June 11, 2010 (UTC) Yea, the thing about that is..... Myanmar isn't really under Yarphei's control, so technically, there's no reason for them to care about it. And you can't take Belgio-Yarphei from Detectivekenny. That's grounds for removal from Future World. Just go ahead and give up. Keep Myanmar if you want, doesn't make a difference, as there's not much you can do with it. You lose, my friend. Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, ) 04:10, June 11, 2010 (UTC) as long as i can be assured i get belgium at war's end.Gatemonger 04:13, June 11, 2010 (UTC) Can we quit with the religion things please :) ? It is getting really personal. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • ) 11:25, June 11, 2010 (UTC) I agree, Super, the anti-atheism and twisted belief that religion (more specifically organized religion) actually helps the world is.... a mix of amusing and disturbing. But FGC ban atheism all he wants but Everett will only condemn him and refuse relations, PAFF would decline him membership and he would end up on a PSF listing (also for reasons other than just the Atheism issue). *"BTW, Yarphei will be removed from Europe by force if necessary, and without any consent from DK if he refuses to bargain" :Also note Gatemonger, you cannot attack Yarphei or anyone without consent. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 14:45, June 11, 2010 (UTC)